building docs (extension of partial build)

[Jonathan Gibbons]

On 10/29/2012 12:16 PM, Mike Duigou wrote:
> The script doesn't seem to be attached. What relation does it have to the "-notimestamp" option? For javadoc checked in to version control we found that having the "-notimestamp" option made things much simpler as regeneration didn't produce spurious diffs.
>
> Mike
>
> On Oct 29 2012, at 12:00 , Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>
>> On 10/29/2012 11:58 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>>> On 2012-09-19 18:46, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
>>>> No comparisons were done against the old javadoc generation.
>>>>
>>> Just a little ping here: we need to add javadoc comparison to the compare script. Or find some other way to do it. If we don't compare, we don't know if we broke anything.
>>>
>>> /Magnus
>>
>> See the attached script that I use to remove timestamps from javadoc docs to aid in comparisons.
>>
>> -- Jon

Script inline.   Using -notimestamp means modifying Makefiles, and 
doesn't address non-javadoc comments, such as those found in corba files.

-- Jon



#!/bin/sh

# Remove timestamps from html files generated by javadoc.
# This includes timestamps generated by javadoc itself,
# and timestamps propogated from the javadoc comments.

for file in $(find $1 -name \*.html | xargs -n 1 grep 
--files-with-matches "Generated by javadoc" ) ; do
     sed --in-place \
     -e 's/\(-- Generated by javadoc \).*\( --\)/\1(removed)\2/' \
     -e 's/\(<meta name="date" content="\).*\(">\)/\1(removed)\2/' \
         -e 
's/\(Monday\|Tuesday\|Wednesday\|Thursday\|Friday\|Saturday\|Sunday\), 
[A-Z][a-z]* [0-9][0-9]*, [12][0-9]* [0-9][0-9:]* \(AM\|PM\) 
PDT/(removed)/' \
     $file
done